Formula 1 now capable of 'internet' broadcasts with new technology Published on Tuesday February 14th 2017

Formula 1 is now capable of delivering broadcasts directly to internet users following tests carried out in 2016.

Work carried out by Tata Communications in conjunction with Formula One Management, which included a test run at last year's Singapore Grand Prix, has proved that the technology is now in place for 'Over the top' broadcasts, more commonly known as 'OTT'.

This would allow for F1 action to be broadcast direct to a viewer via the internet, rather than requiring access to a particular television channel, which has been F1's mode of delivery for decades.

Tata's managing director of F1 business, Mehul Kapadia, said a lot of effort has gone into removing the delay often associated with watching something live through an internet connection.

"One of the challenges that OTT has faced in the past is that what you see on your television versus what you see on your iPad or phone would not be synced up," he told Autosport.

"That was the one big technology challenge that we have worked on solving, and demonstrating that we can do it.

"This was something we ran at the Singapore race and I would say the technology is now there to do it."

However, F1 is unlikely to witness a quick shift to OTT as its main form of broadcast, with TV companies still paying high fees for exclusive rights.

Kapadia added: "OTT has a couple of answers needed from a commercial standpoint.

"It is a commercial challenge about whether sports franchises want to directly reach to consumers and then not have the scale that comes to them from broadcasters."

While new F1 owner Liberty Media is unlikely to be able to create a shift in the championship's TV model in the short term, Kapadia expects plenty of areas to improve for fans in terms of the viewing experience.

"Loads of opportunities are still there, and there are so many things that we can work on," he added.

"The entire digital transformation that is happening, whether it is the way we work or the way we look at the sport, or how we interact with the sport when you are at the race track or at the stadium.

"Whether you are watching football, F1 or cricket, the entertainment value is coming from being immersive and closer to the sport.

"While some part of that immersion has been solved by what sort of data you can get on your second screen, fundamentally your primary viewing experience, irrespective of the screen size, needs to give you more immersion, more choice in terms of how you want to view it, and a higher degree of what data points you now want to look at.

"We are looking at a 360-degree digital transformation that is going to happen, and all of it catering for fans."

Europe’s governing body, the European Parliament, today voted for an “immediate investigation” into the takeover of Formula One auto racing by Liberty Media last month due to allegations that it broke the law.

The European Parliament publishes an annual Competition Report and amongst the anti-trust areas referenced in the 2017 edition is the motion to back “calls for an immediate investigation into competition concerns arising from the Formula One motorsport industry.” The vote to approve the report was passed through today with 476 in favor compared to 156 against.

It follows a formal complaint made in 2015 by two of F1’s smaller teams – Force India and Sauber. They raised concerned about F1’s governance and the distribution of its $903.8 million in prize money which is biased towards the top performers. An anti-trust investigation could lead to contracts at the core of the auto racing series being torn up if they are declared illegal. It would create uncertainty for Liberty and its investors about the structure of the business they have acquired but that’s just the start.

It could also jeopardise F1’s future as its best-known teams, including Ferrari, have built their business models around the multi-million Dollar bonuses they receive. There is a real risk they could reverse out of the series if Europe’s anti-trust regulator forced F1 to balance its prize money payments. However, that is by far and away not the most serious implication of an investigation for Liberty. The validity of its entire investment in F1 could be called into question.

The F1 championship has been held for the past 67 years but July 22 2013 could prove to be one of the most significant dates in its history. This is when auto racing’s regulator the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) signed a deal which granted it an option on a 1% stake in F1’s parent company Delta Topco. The FIA took the option up later in the year and bought the stake for $458,197.34 which was a bargain-basement price as it was informed at the time that it had a market value of $70 million.

In 2013 the FIA issued three press releases about the deal it had signed which also confirmed the terms of its governance of F1 until 2030. However not one of the releases mentioned that the FIA had acquired the stake in Delta Topco which was later revealed by this author in an article in Britain’s Guardian newspaper. One crucial detail was yet to be revealed.

The FIA didn’t acquire the 1% stake from one of the shareholders in Delta Topco but from the company itself which was controlled by the private equity firm CVC. It owned a 38.1% stake in Delta Topco, worth around $3 billion, and in order to exit through a sale it needed the FIA’s approval as it would involve F1 changing control. This approval came last month and it fuelled claims that there was a conflict of interest.

According to a recent report in The Economist, discussions about the agreement with the FIA had been going on for around a year prior to the deal being signed on 22 July 2013. At the start of the previous year CVC planned to exit F1 through a flotation which would not have needed the FIA’s approval. However, a flotation became increasingly less likely over the following 12 months as F1’s chief executive Bernie Ecclestone became embroiled in a bribery scandal.

He was accused of paying part of a $44 million bribe to German banker Gerhard Gribkowsky to steer the sale of F1 to CVC in 2006. On 27 June 2012 Mr Gribkowsky was found guilty of receiving a bribe and newspapers including Britain’s Independent reported that in light of the outcome“German police were considering whether to prosecute” Mr Ecclestone.

On 17 July 2013 CVC issued a press release confirming that Mr Ecclestone had received a bill of indictment, in English, from the Munich Regional Court and this effectively put the brakes on the Initial Public Offering (IPO). It would be almost inconceivable to successfully float a company which has a CEO who is facing the possibility of jail time as a result of criminal charges for bribery.

A spokesperson for Delta Topco told the Economist “there can be no inference” that the transfer of the 1% was an inducement to the FIA to approve a sale. It said “no such transaction was contemplated” at the time because Delta Topco was still “contemplating and preparing for an IPO.” The spokesperson added that the timing of the July 2013 options grant was not connected to the indictment of Mr Ecclestone but was “the result of a 12-month negotiation” over renewing the terms with the FIA.

The case against Mr Ecclestone was settled in 2014 with the judge in Munich saying that “prosecution of the defendant due to bribery is not probable.” By then CVC had changed its direction. As the chronology below shows, CVC’s co-chairman Donald Mackenzie told Reuters in November 2013 that the company had “no plans” to float F1 in the imminent future. Instead CVC was considering exiting through a sale which is exactly what happened when Liberty offered $8 billion putting an $80 million value on the FIA’s 1% stake.

There is no suggestion that Liberty wasn’t suitable buyer but as Forbes has revealed it didn’t make its first approach to CVC until September 2013 so when the FIA acquired its 1% stake two months earlier it could not have known for certain who would buy F1. What the FIA did know for certain is that its 1% stake came with the crucial condition that it could only be monetized in the event of a sale by CVC and this required its approval.

The FIA knew that if it approved the sale it would make a net profit of $79.5 million on its stake and the only way it could get it was by approving the sale. CVC on the other hand needed the FIA’s approval in order to sell its stake and make $3 billion on it. Liberty needed the approval to buy F1 and it paid a total of $80 million in cash and shares to the FIA.

Liberty is listed on the Nasdaq with the ticker FWONK and repeatedly disclosed in its filings with the Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) that the FIA’s approval was needed to close the takeover. However, it didn’t highlight the fact that the FIA has a stake in F1 and that Liberty would therefore be paying the regulator if it approved the deal.

Paul Hembery says there will be no point complaining if the move to lower degradation tyres makes Formula 1 grands prix less exciting because Pirelli is doing what was asked.

Pirelli has overhauled its tyre concept to reduce degradation for 2017, as requested by the new rules, allowing drivers to push harder in a philosophy that is a departure from the policy it has followed since it became F1's tyre supplier in 2011.

Pirelli motorsport chief Hembery has previously said F1 could end up with processional racing this year because the rules shake-up, which includes significant tweaks to aerodynamics, will spread the field out.

Speaking at an event in Turin to mark Pirelli's 110th motorsport anniversary, Hembery told Motorsport.com that if the new tyre concept does not deliver a good show, the blame should not lie with the Italian company.

"You can't please everyone and you can only go in one of two directions," Hembery said. "We did something from the outset which was desired, then there was a decision to go in another direction.

"We're just following what the sport asks us. All we ask is that they tell us what they want. There's no point in complaining that we deliver what we have been asked to deliver.

"As a sport we're moving in a different direction, and if it works as people say then we should get good racing."

While the modified 2015 mule cars Pirelli used for testing failed to deliver the required amount of downforce expected in 2017, the tyre supplier was able to fall back on simulation data.

"The biggest challenge is if you don't have downforce, you might not be able to get the tyres working as intended, because we worked to a level of downforce given by the simulation," he said.

"It's true the mule cars were some way off in terms of performance levels, but we do have the simulation data.

"That's the question, how close will the cars be to that data – maybe they will have more and go much quicker."

Hembery feels while there may be fewer pitstops, the change in the rules should create a situation where overtaking possibilities are increased.

"We'll see fewer stops," he said. "That comes with less degradation. You come into the pits either because of performance loss [due to degradation] or wear, and in this case we are reducing both.

"We'll see a lot more one-stop races but if we deliver with the aerodynamic package cars that are closer together, and the tyre's not overheating on the surface, drivers will be able to push and lead to a scenario where overtaking is improved."

I for one will not pay anything in addition to my already extortionate Comcast cable bill package for Formula 1 coverage, even it's "enhanced or expanded" especially in the
(dim) light of the lackluster F1 of today. This is a microscopic data tidbit that Liberty won't take into account:) Just saying, though this may not be the best place to post.

British MEP Anneliese Dodds, who has regularly voiced her suspicions about anti-competitive practices in F1, recently put an extra focus on the sale, by successfully calling for approval for an investigation by the European Parliament, although it won't necessarily go ahead.

She wrote: "There is also significant conflict of interest over the recent sale of the sport to Liberty Media, after the regulator received a $79.5million (£63.7m) profit from authorising the sale.

ADVERTISING

"I have written a number of letters to the European Commission calling for a full investigation and I am grateful that the rest of the European Parliament has added its voice to this call."

The FIA has responded by stressing that it still believes that there was no conflict of interest, distancing itself from the commercial agreements between the Commercial Rights Holder and the teams, and pointing out that it could only withhold permission for the sale if believed that the CRH could not fulfil its obligations it went ahead.

In a statement referencing the sale the FIA said that it "has been made aware of certain declarations and comments, clearly inaccurately informed or made maliciously, relating to this process. In light of this, the FIA wishes to make clear the following once again:

"Firstly, the prize money allocated in the Formula One World Championship is done so in accordance with the bilateral agreements that exist between each team and the Commercial Rights Holder (CRH). The FIA has no knowledge of these agreements.

"Secondly, there is no conflict of interest on the part of the FIA with regard to its approval of the change of control of the CRH which has been approved by the World Motor Sport Council taking into consideration exclusively the terms of the existing agreements between the CRH and the FIA and the best interests of the Championship.

"As per the Agreements made in 2001 for 100 Years, the FIA could only have withheld its consent in the event that the change of control would materially alter the ability of the CRH to fulfil its obligations; it is obvious that the taking of control of the Formula One Group by Liberty does not create such a risk, and nobody has ever suggested a different view in this respect."

In its conclusion the FIA said that it "would naturally be happy to demonstrate the absence of any conflict of interest to any competent authority that may so request.

"Once again, the FIA looks forward to its collaboration with both Liberty and the Formula One Group to create a constructive relationship that will ensure the continued success and the development of the FIA Formula One World Championship in the long term."

The sport's new owner Liberty Media has been generally welcomed to the paddock, but 1996 world champion Damon Hill compared the company to "the Trump administration".

"I think they're learning," he told the London publication City AM.

The latest rumour flowing out of Portuguese media sources is that some in F1 want the controversial current engine regulations to take a further step forwards for the post-2020 period.

Mercedes' Toto Wolff told German newspaper FAZ recently: "We have to look at how we can pull even more power from these hybrid engines.

"Formula one is the fastest laboratory in the world and we must not abandon that."

His comments come amid strong contrary opinions that F1 should actually abandon its 'green' credentials and focus more on the spectacle, with loud, fuel-guzzling engines in the future.

But the Portuguese rumour is that the post-2020 vision could be of the existing traditional engine allied to MGU-H and MGU-K, but with additional 'hybrid' elements incorporating the front wheels as well.

A source told us: "Mercedes and Honda would be keen on this kind of technology. Personally I'm excited about the prospect of 4x4 F1 cars."

But a potential dispute over the post-2020 engine regulations is not the only future prospect. There are also fundamental disagreements about how the sport's huge revenues should be split, with some believing the current system is even "anti-competitive".

Hill continued: "I think it is worth asking those questions. We do appear to have a situation where teams are favoured. Particularly Ferrari is a little bit more than everyone else and seems to get some sort of preferential treatment."

Amid that talk, another rumour is that there could be a move to put the former teams alliance - or FOTA - back together, after it dissolved in 2014.

"I created FOTA to ensure that the drivers were again at the centre," Flavio Briatore told Italian broadcaster Sky Sport 24 recently.

"Those watching TV don't care if the engine can go to the moon or not. They want the drivers in cars that have more or less the same performance."

Its still a ways out and it is rumours but I can see this.....aside from the hybrid PU's()....only because there is only so much hp/ft lbs that a RWD car can put down on the asphalt....an extra 2 would most definitely help....from a luanch and corner perspective AND rain perspective. However there would be a increase in weight in an F1 car due to the transfer case.

Ross Brawn, F1's sporting chief on behalf of new owner Liberty Media, told Sport Bild: "The ultimate goal is putting formula one, F2 and F3 all together" in the way that the MotoGP categories are layered.

And that plan appears to be also backed by F1's governing body.

In fact, it is believed an announcement of GP2's rebranding is imminent.

FIA president Jean Todt told the Paris federation's own Auto magazine: "Rationalising the pathway to formula one has been a major goal of the FIA in my time here and the designation of a new F2 would achieve that goal."

Ross Brawn, F1's sporting chief on behalf of new owner Liberty Media, told Sport Bild: "The ultimate goal is putting formula one, F2 and F3 all together" in the way that the MotoGP categories are layered.

And that plan appears to be also backed by F1's governing body.

In fact, it is believed an announcement of GP2's rebranding is imminent.

FIA president Jean Todt told the Paris federation's own Auto magazine: "Rationalising the pathway to formula one has been a major goal of the FIA in my time here and the designation of a new F2 would achieve that goal."

Liberty Media boss Greg Maffei says that Formula 1 might need to make changes to its current engine regulations.

Last week, FIA president Jean Todt ruled out a return to screaming V8, V10 or V12 engines, declaring it would "not be accepted by global society." However, the volume of the current hybrid power units remains highly controversial, which apparently has not escaped the notice of the sport's new owners.

"Yes, there are some things to do around the engines, there are some things to do around the (drag reduction system), there are a few things to do to try to balance the amount of money the teams get," Liberty chief executive Maffei is quoted by the Spanish sports newspaper AS.

He also said that moves are afoot to bring back some European circuits that have become lost to the F1 calendar.

"There are always races that come and go, but it's more negative when it's a traditional European race, which is in the heart of the fans," said Maffei. "We have already started a process to bring some of these circuits back."

And he said some race weekends must be made more exciting overall.

"We will take as reference the best Grands Prix, such as Mexico, Singapore and Abu Dhabi, and bring what happens there to the traditional tracks," said Maffei.

I like this guy already....this Greg Maffei.....bring back old circuits(European ones especially), do away with circuits that have no value towards F1....AND a possibility of changing the current formula of engines, aero and money alottment.

I don't know, I'll reserve judgement for a while. He talks a lot but like they say... actions speak louder than words. If they actually get races scheduled in some (or even one!) of the old European circuits that'll start to win me over.

Forza Ferrari !"You need great passion, because everything you do with great pleasure, you do well." - Juan Manuel Fangio

Bernie is just a greedy old troll. He would milk a promoter for a few years, then when they wised up and tried to renegotiate he would drop them. That is how we got a ton of Tilke snoose fests in places no one cares about.

Bernie is just a greedy old troll. He would milk a promoter for a few years, then when they wised up and tried to renegotiate he would drop them. That is how we got a ton of Tilke snoose fests in places no one cares about.

yep, not bad for a car salesman. He ran the venue's like a 5 star hotel.....want the service, you have to anty up otherwise don't even bother me.

A broad agreement has been reached for the future of Formula One engine technology, with the sport targeting cheaper, louder and powerful engines after 2020.

The FIA held a meeting in Paris on Friday to set out key objectives for the sport's future engine regulations, which was attended by F1's current engine manufacturers as well as motoring companies that are not involved in F1, such as the Volkswagen Group. The broad agreements are likely to see the current 1.6-litre V6 turbo hybrids ditched for a simpler solution that can still be used by manufacturers as a test bed for road car technology.

Further details will be decided over the coming years, but the FIA said the manufacturers and F1's stakeholders were aligned on the following points for the post-2020 engine formula.
▪
A desire to maintain F1 as the pinnacle of motor sport technology, and as a laboratory for developing technology that is relevant to road cars

▪
Striving for future power units to be powerful, while becoming simpler and less costly to develop and produce

▪
Improving the sound of the power units

▪
A desire to allow drivers to drive harder at all times

"I was very pleased with the process, and the fact that so many different stakeholders were able to agree on a direction for the FIA Formula One World Championship in such an important technical area," Todt said.

"Of course, now we must sit down and work through the fine details of exactly what the 2021 power units will be -- but we have begun on the right foot, and I am looking forward to working through the process to come up with the best decision for Formula One into the future."

The current V6 turbo hybrid engines were introduced on a fuel-efficiency formula, which was designed to appeal to new manufacturers while spearheading the push for greener technology in the motor industry. In one sense they have been a huge success, with the current power units achieving roughly 50 per cent thermal efficiency compared to the 30 per cent of the naturally-aspirated V8s that went before.

However, only Honda has opted to return to the sport in the hybrid era and has struggled to catch up with the development of rivals Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault. What's more, fans have reacted negatively to the muffled exhaust note of the V6 turbo engines compared to high-revving V8 screamers of the previous generation.

Last year, the current regulations were locked in place until 2020 by an agreement between teams and the FIA aimed at achieving performance convergence, lower costs and an improved the noise. The first of those two objectives appear to be achievable in that timeframe, but fans may have to wait until after 2020 for a more exotic exhaust not to return to F1.

So less costlier PU's, more simpler, improve the sound and a desire for drivers to drive harder at ALL TIMES......so basically it sounds they are probably going to stick with the current formula since in essence it will be cheaper by then, improve on the exhaust note and they will be simpler by then as well.....sounds good to me.

Held at the Federation’s Paris headquarters and chaired by FIA President Jean Todt, the meeting was attended by a variety of Formula One’s key stakeholders, including representatives of the FIA, the new Commercial Rights Holder, current Power Unit suppliers, as well as automotive manufacturers and independent suppliers not currently involved in F1.

A number of the attending automotive manufacturers were also represented by their road car arms.

The meeting resulted in broad agreement for the future evolution of Formula One power units, with all parties seemingly aligned in their focus on:

a desire to maintain F1 as the pinnacle of motor sport technology, and as a laboratory for developing technology that is relevant to road cars striving for future power units to be powerful, while becoming simpler and less costly to develop and produce improving the sound of the power units a desire to allow drivers to drive harder at all times.

FIA President Jean Todt chaired the meeting, and was enthused by the positive discussion.

“I was very pleased with the process, and the fact that so many different stakeholders were able to agree on a direction for the FIA Formula One World Championship in such an important technical area,” said Mr Todt.

“Of course, now we must sit down and work through the fine details of exactly what the 2021 power units will be – but we have begun on the right foot, and I am looking forward to working through the process to come up with the best decision for Formula One into the future.”

The FIA Formula One World Championship is committed to running the current 1.6-litre six-cylinder turbo hybrid power units until 2020. The current units have demonstrated astonishing technological advancement, producing between 900 and 1000 horsepower, while saving 30 per cent on fuel consumption compared to previous generation engines, and approaching the magic 50% thermal efficiency number – a figure that was unheard of three years ago.

From 2021, the championship can introduce a new power unit configuration.

END QUOTE

Reps from Volkswagen were at the meeting (possible Audi or Lambo entry in F1)

A new dawn beckons for Formula 1, and this time the engine manufacturers agree that road relevance need not be the primary driver behind what powers the sport into the future

For many, the talks held last week between the FIA, FOM and engine manufacturers about the direction of the sport following new commercial deals in 2021 will be seen as a positive.

But is Formula 1 about to put one foot into the past, rather than one into the future?

The V6 hybrid power units are considered too complex, expensive and even mundane compared to what is possible if the regulations are framed differently.

The question now comes down to how the sport wants to appear in the eyes of the world, given the headline numbers that have been achieved since 2014: 30 percent less fuel used per race, thermal efficiency around 50 percent and near on 1000bhp.

Nice but not worth the hassle?

The ERS is a fascinating piece of technology and responsible for a significant portion of the hybrid power unit's efficiency and performance. However, the manufacturers have cited the MGU-H as problematic in terms of cost and development.

The issues are not entirely direct either, they're also due to the way in which the MGU-K is reliant on the MGU-H for a direct supply of energy - missing out the energy storage, making for a complex energy scheme that goes unnoticed by the viewer but needs constant management by the driver and team in order to maintain overall efficiency and performance.

Irrespective of the MGU-H's current role in increasing efficiency, it seems the manufacturers are therefore happy to see the back of the motor generator, as these early talks suggest they'll scrap it as part of the 2021 overhaul.

Turbocharged future

The return to turbocharging as part of the scheme to downsize the internal combustion engine and increase hybridisation was a no-brainer for 2014 and has led the sport to a point where it is now happy to accept boost as a performance enhancement.

So much so in fact that plans for F1's next engine will likely see a turbo attached to either side of it, as the sport looks towards a much better power-to-weight ratio, in order that the cars once again need to be wrestled around the track.

And speaking of power-to-weight, one of the issues the sport has faced during the hybrid era is the increase in the car's overall weight - now up to a staggering 728kgs, nearly 100kg up on the V8 era.

The new engine must look to reverse this trend and bring the minimum weight down once more, meaning the headline power figure need not be so high.

Power struggle

Talk of much more powerful engines has already ensued in any case, with a 1200-1300bhp target already put in mind and a much larger onus placed on delivery from the MGU-K/KERS, which was previously doubled from the 60kw allowed alongside the V8s to 120kw for the current power unit.

It makes sense to scale that leap in the same way for the next engine, up to 240kw or roughly 320bhp, but that'll come down to whether it's viable and to whether the power dispensed is part of the overall energy scheme or whether it's to be used as a push-to-pass system, like KERS was.

You could make an argument for both: allow the delivery of 120kw (roughly 160bhp) in line with the power created by the engine, as we have now, and an optional boost of more electrical energy when available, giving the driver a tactical weapon to attack and defend.

One of the issues in increasing the role of the MGU-K without the MGU-H to support it is recovering the energy, especially if it needs to make even more and could result in a severe balance issue for the drivers, almost like applying the handbrake in every corner.

However, talk did turn to having a MGU-K across the front axle too, albeit only for recovery in order to maintain simplicity.

Delivering the juice

When the hybrid regulations were originally framed, they called for delivery of fuel via two methods: port injection and direct injection, but as plans matured only the latter survived and has since led to a development war in lean burn technology, such as the turbulent jet ignition introduced by Ferrari last season.

It'll be interesting to see if this changes, as the new regulations are framed - as it appears that a concerted effort will be made to create more noise with the next engine, too.

Of course, without the MGU-H the turbos will also make a little more noise in their own right but resolving the fuel flow model and the delivery system will allow the engine to rev out further too.

Several team bosses discussed the future direction of Formula 1’s engine rules today; with different opinions offered on what power plants the championship should use from 2021.

Following a meeting between the FIA and F1’s current engine manufacturers last week – which was also attended by Ross Brawn on behalf of Formula One Management and representatives from OEM companies not currently involved in the series – the governing body issued a statement explaining that a broad agreement had been made to make the new engines cheaper and nosier than the current hybrid V6 turbo power units.

The exact specifications of the future engines are still being discussed, but the outcome of the meeting suggested they would become simpler, while retaining high power levels and remaining relevant to road car technology.

The engine proposals were discussed during the team principals’ press conference at the Chinese Grand Prix, which is taking place in Shanghai this weekend.

Tost – who’s team has run Renault and Ferrari engines since the V6 turbo regulations came in at the start of the 2014 season – and Kaltenborn both called for parity between the different power trains, and the former offered his thoughts on the high cost of the current units.

He said: “The current engine is simply far too expensive. From the technology side, it’s a fantastic engine, it’s extraordinary technology but it’s therefore also very, very expensive.

Franz Tost

“Regarding the parity and the costs,” he continued. “This is now in the hands of the people who make the regulations and if the development is restricted from the beginning onwards with very strong regulations then I think we will achieve the goals with the parity and the costs and the sound, it should be able to find a solution that the fans are happy with, the music of this new engine.”

Costs are also a major concern for Kaltenborn, who outlined her belief that engine performance should not be the factor that determines success in F1 after 2021.

She said: “We want them to come down to an affordable level. But more importantly there should be a certain parity amongst the powertrains. We wouldn’t want that the engine should be the main denominator or differentiator in performance. So what’s very important is the parity and the costs.”

Although the V6 turbo engines have divided opinion among F1 insiders and fans, the technology they use is at an extremely high level. Engineers have noted that the current power unit is more powerful than the V8s and V10s used in previous eras, while breaking new ground in terms of efficiency.

Steiner and Fernley argued that F1’s future engines should not drop the technological advancements used in the current units.

“The technology in this engine is amazing for everybody involved in engines, this is an amazing technology, so now we go backwards and maybe invest more money to develop something which is actually not as sophisticated as this,” said Steiner.

Fernley added: “I think that the principle of the current engine shouldn’t just be abandoned, a lot of work has gone into it but I think it could be simplified a little bit. I think a lot of the things that we’re doing perhaps go beyond what even the most sophisticated of fans is understanding, so we could come back a little bit, get the cost right, obviously get the power and the noise right and move forward but you don’t have to throw the baby out with the bathwater.”

Abiteboul, who represented the only engine manufacturer at today’s press conference, described his belief that F1’s future engines should retain their relevance to road car technology. This was a crucial argument that led to F1 adopting the hybrid engine rules in the first place, with Renault arguing in the early part of this decade that it would quit the championship if such technology was not implemented.

He said: “I don’t think that Formula 1 can afford to turn its back on some things that are relevant to the manufacturer, given the current business model of Formula 1. Formula 1 could completely change to a different business model and go for something that is really different and not road-relevant but that would be a brave manoeuvre.”

Abiteboul also believes that the future engines should continue to incorporate electrical elements, but suggested the MGU-H could be dropped after 2021.

He said: “I think everyone agrees that there should be some element of electrification. We don’t necessarily see some road relevance or contribution to the show to an element like MGU-H, so that this orientation for the future, I think the whole debate would be on the architecture of the internal combustion engine which will be an interesting debate and some things that I guess will keep us busy for the next few months.”

Another meeting between the FIA, FOM and the engine manufacturers is expected to take place in May and the governing body has tasked the parties to come up with proposals for the new power units. Those ideas will then be regularly assessed going forward as F1 again heads towards its next new era.

After 19 years, it has been announced that this year’s Grand Prix in Malaysia is to be the country’s last. The decision was taken jointly by Formula 1 and Sepang International Circuit (SIC).

Malaysia joined the F1 calendar in 1999, and both Formula 1 and SIC say they are determined to make this year’s event in October a fitting finale for the ground-breaking circuit.

“It’s always sad to say goodbye to a member of the Formula 1 family,” commented Sean Bratches, Managing Director, Commercial Operations, Formula 1. “Over nearly two decades, the Malaysian Formula 1 fans have proven themselves to be some of the sport’s most passionate supporters.

“As we said in Melbourne, we have big plans for bringing our global fan base closer to the sport than ever before, providing an enhanced digital experience and creating new events. We’re looking forward to talking more about these plans as the season progresses.

“We will have 21 exciting events to look forward to in the 2018 calendar, with the additions of the French and German races. I’d like to take this opportunity to thank the Sepang International Circuit for their hospitality and professionalism over the years, and their ongoing commitment to motorsport.”

During its time on the Formula 1 calendar, not only has Malaysia built a loyal F1 fan base, it has also become a major force in motor racing and successfully established itself as a global tourist destination.

when it first opened, the government paid for most of the venue to be there, as years went by ticket prices have risen by alot to where people in that area cannot afford it. This was one of Bernie's ideas....he would charge alot for the venue...."if you can't afford it, don't even bother me." Plus there is alot of corruption going on with the Malaysian govt. and people there are really getting fed-up with everything there....including F1.